CHAP. VII.
Oil this thing may likewise be explained as follows: Daemons preside with a guardian power over arcane mysteries, and this in so remarkable a degree, because the orderly dis- tribution of things in the universe is primarily contained in daemons. For the parts of the universe remain in order, because the benefi- cent power of Osiris continues sacred and un- defiled, and is not mingled with any opposing error and perturbation. The life of all things likewise remains pure and incorruptible, be- cause the occult vivific beauties of the produc- tive principles in Isis do not descend into body which is born along,* and is the object of sight. But all things continue immoveable and perpetual, because the course of the sun is never stopped. And all things remain perfect and entire, because the arcana in the adytum f are never disclosed. Hence, in those particu- lars in which the whole of things possesses its safety, I mean in arcana being always preserved occult, and in the ineffable essence of the Gods, never receiving a contrary condition; in these, terrestrial daemons cannot endure, even t Here too for A/3vSo) I read aSuTc^o.
in words, to hear that they subsist otherwise than they do, or that they become profaned; and on this account threatening language has a certain power when employed against them. No one, however, threatens the Gods, nor is such a mode of invocation addressed to them. Hence with the Chaldeans, by whom words used to the Gods alone are preserved distinct and pure, no threats are employed. But the Egyptians, mingling dsemoniacal words with divine signatures, sometimes employ threats. You have, therefore, an answer to these doubts, concise indeed, but I think sufficiently free from error.
SECTION VII.
CHAP. I.
The doubts also that follow in the next place require for their solution the assistance of the same divinely-wise Muse. But I am desirous, previous to this, to unfold to you the pecu- liarity of the theology of the Egyptians. For they, imitating the nature of the universe, and the fabricative energy of the Gods, exhibit certain images through symbols of mystic, occult, and invisible intellections; just as na- ture, after a certain manner, expresses invisible reasons [or productive powers] through visible forms. But the fabricative energy of the Gods delineates the truth of forms, through visible images. Hence the Egyptians, perceiving that all superior natures rejoice in the similitude to them of inferior beings, and thus wishing to fill the latter with good, through the greatest possible imitation of the former, very properly exhibit a mode of theologizing adapted to the mystic doctrine concealed in the symbols.
CHAP. II.
CHAP. II.
Hear, therefore, the intellectual interpretation of symbols, according to the conceptions of the Egyptians; at the same time removing from your imagination and your ears the image of things symbolical, but elevating yourself to in- tellectual truth. By “77^^Ve,” therefore, under- stand every thing corporeal-formed and mate- rial; or that which is nutritive and prolific; or such as the material species of nature is, which is borne along in conjunction with the unstable flux of matter; or a thing of such a kind as that which the river of generation receives, and which subsides together with it; or the pri- mordial cause of the elements, and of all the powers distributed about the elements, and which must be antecedently conceived to exist analogous to a foundation. Being, therefore, a thing of this kind, the God who is the cause of generation, of all nature, and of all the powers in the elements, as transcending these, and as being immaterial, incorporeal, and supernatural, unbegotten and impartible, wholly derived from himself, and concealed in himself, — this God precedes all things, and comprehends all things in himself. And because, indeed, he compre- hends all things, and imparts himself to all mundane natures, he is from these unfolded into light. Because, however, he transcends all things, and is by himself expanded above them, on this account he presents himself to the view as separate, exempt, elevated, and expanded by himself above the powers and elements in the world. The following symbol, likewise, testifies the truth of this. For by the God “ sitting above the lotus” a transcen- dency and strength which by no means come into contact with the mire, are obscurely signi- fied, and also indicate his intellectual and em- pyrean empire. For every thing belonging to the lotus is seen to be circular, viz. both the form of the leaves and the fruit; and circulation is alone allied to the motion of intellect, which energizes with invariable sameness, in one order, - and according to one reason. But the God is established by himself, and above a dominion and energy of this kind, venerable and holy, superexpanded, and abiding in himself, which his being seated is intended to signify. When the God, also, is represented as “ sailing in a ship” * it exhibits to us the power which * Conformably to this, Martianus Capella also, in lib. ii. De Nuptiis Philol. &c. speaking of the sun, says, "Ibi quandam navim, totius naturae cursus diversa cupiditate moderantem, cunctaque flammaium congestione plenissi- mam, et beatis circumactam mercibus conspicatur. Cui governs the world. As, therefore, the pilot being separate from the ship presides over the rudder of it, thus the sun having a separate subsistence, governs the helm of the whole world. And as the pilot directs all things from the stern, giving from himself a small principle of motion to the vessel; thus, also, by a much greater priority, the God indivisibly imparts supernally from the first principles of nature, the primordial causes of motions. These particulars, therefore, and still more than these, are indicated by the God sailing in a ship.
nautae septem, germani tamen, suique similes praesidebant in prora. Praesidebat in prora felis forma depicta, leonis in arbore, crocodili in extimo.” For these animals, the cat, the lion, and the crocodile were peculiarly sacred to the sun. Martianus adds, ^‘’In eadem vero rate, fons quidem lucis aethereae, arcanisque fluoribus manans, in totius mundi lumina fundebatur.” i. e. " In the same ship there was a fountain of etherial light flowing with arcane streams, which were poured into all the luminaries of the world.” < Porphyry, likewise, in his treatise De Antro Nymph, says, “that the Egyptians placed the sun and all daemons not connected with any thing solid or stable, but raised on a sailing vessel.”
CHAP. III.
CHAP. III.
Since, however, every part of the heavens, every sign of the zodiac,^^ all the motion of the heavens, every period of time according to which the world is moved, and all things con- tained in the wholes of the universe, receive the powers which descend from the sun, some of which are complicated with these wholes, but others transcend a commixture with them, the symbolical mode of signification represents these also, indicating “ that the sun is diversi- fied according to the signs of the zodiac, and that every hour he changes his form'’ At the same time, also, it indicates his immutable, stable, never failing, and at once collected - communication of good to the whole world. But since the recipients of the impartible gift of the God are variously affected towards it, and receive multiform powers from the sun, according to their peculiar motions, hence the symbolical doctrine evinces through the multi- tude of the gifts, that the God is one, and ex- hibits his one power through multiform powers. Hence, likewise, it says that he is one and the * In the original 7rav ^wSiov, which Gale erroneously translates anhnalia omnia.
same, but that the vicissitudes of his form, and his configurations, must be admitted to exist in the recipients. On this account it asserts “ that he is changed every hour, according to the signs of the zodiac,” in consequence of these being variously changed about the God, according to the many modes by which they receive him. The Egyptians use prayers to the sun, conformable to these assertions, not only in visions which are seen by the bodily eyes, but also in their more common supplica- tions, all which have such a meaning as this, and are offered to the God conformably to a symbolic and mystic doctrine of this kind. Hence it would not be reasonable in any one to undertake a defence of them.
CHAP. IV.
But the inquiries which follow in the next place, require a more abundant doctrine, in order to their elucidation. At the same time, however, it is necessary to discuss the truth concerning them with brevity. For you in- quire “ what efficacy there is in names that are not significant” * They are not, however, as * Of this kind are the following names in Alexand. Tral- lian. lib. ii. Mcv, Gpcv, Mop, ^op, Teu^, Za, Zwv, 0e, Aov, U you think, without signification; but let them be indeed unknown to us (though some of them are known to us, the explications of which we receive from the Gods), yet to the Gods all of them are significant, though not according to an effahle mode; nor in such a way as that which is significant and indicative with men through imaginations; but either intellectually, conformably to the divine intel- lect which is in us; or ineffably, and in a way more excellent and simple, and conformably to the intellect which is united to the Gods. It is requisite, therefore, to take away all con- ceptions derived by an abstraction from sen- sibles, and all logical evolutions from divine names; and likewise the connascent physical Xpi, Fe Ze, flv, i. e. Meu, Threu, Mor, Phor, Teux, Za, Zdn, The, Lou, Chi, Ge, Ze, On. By these names Alex- ander Trallianus says, the sun becomes fixed in the heavens. He adds, Again behold the great name la^, (lege law), Zvo)v, Qpev^, BaiV, Xww/c, i. e. lad, Azuph, Zudn, Threux, Bam, Chdoh.” Among the Latins, also, Cato, Varro, and Marcellus de Medicamentis Empiricis, there are examples of these names; the power and efficacy of which, as Gale observes, are testified by history, though it is not easy to explain the reason of their operation.
* Proclus, in commenting on the following words of Plato in the Timaeus, (see vol. i. p. 228, of my translation of his Commentary), viz. ^^Let, therefore, this universe be de- nominated by us all heaven, or the world, or whatever other appellation it may be especially adapted to receive,” beautisimilitudes of language to things which exist in nature. But the intellectual and divine fully thus observes concerning the divine name of the world. "As of statues established by the telestic art, some things pertaining to them are manifest, but others are inwardly concealed, being symbolical of the presence of the Gods, and which are only known to the mystic artists themselves; after the same manner, the world being a statue of the in- telligible, and perfected by the father, has indeed some things which are visible indications of its divinity; but others, which are the invisible impressions of the participa- tion of being received by it from the father, who gave it per- fection, in order that through these it may be eternally rooted in real being. Heaven, indeed, and the world are names significant of the powers in the universe; the latter, so far as it proceeds from the intelligible; but the former, so far as it is converted to it. It is, however, necessary to know that the divine name of its abiding power, and which is a symbol of the impression of the Demiurgus, according to which it does not proceed out of being, is ineffable and arcane, and known only to the Gods themselves. For there are names adapted to every order of things; those, indeed, that are adapted to divine natures being divine, to the objects of dianoia being dianoetic, and to the objects of opinion doxastic. This also Plato says in the Cratylus, where he embraces what is asserted by Homer on this subject, who admits that names of the same things are with the Gods different from those that subsist in the opinions of men.
And, Xanthua by God, by men Scamander call’d Iliad xx. v. 74.
Which the Goda Chalcia, men Cymindis call.
Iliad xiv. v. 291.
And in a similar manner in many other names. For as the knowledge of the Gods is different from that of partial souls, symbolical character of divine similitude must be admitted to have a subsistence in names. And, moreover, though it should be unknown to us, yet this very circumstance is that which is most venerable in it, for it is too excellent to be divided into knowledge. But in those thus also the names of the one are different from those of the other; sinee divine names unfold the whole essence of the things named, but those of men only partially come into con- tact with them. Plato, therefore, knowing that this pre- existed in the world, omits the divine and ineffable name itself, which is different from the apparent name, and with the greatest caution introduces it as a symbol of the divine impression which the world contains. For the words, or whatever other appellation ” and “ it may receive” are a latent hymn of the mundane name, as ineffable, and as allotted a divine essence, in order that it may be coordinate to what is signified by it. Hence, also, divine mundane names are delivered by Theurgists; some of which are called by them ineffable, but others effable; and some being significant of the invisible powers in the world, but others of the visible elements from which it derives its completion. Through these causes, therefore, as hypotheses, the mundane form, the demiurgic cause and paradigm, and the apparent and unapparent name of the world are delivered. And the former name, indeed, is dyadic, but the latter monadic. For the words “whatever other” are significant of oneness. You may also consider the ineffable name of the universe as significant of its abiding in the father; but the name world, as indicative of its progression; and heaven of its conversion. But through the three, you have the final cause, on account of which it is full of good; abiding ineffably, proceeding perfectly, and converting itself to the good as the antecedent object of desire.”
names which we can scientifically analyze,* we possess a knowledge of the whole divine essence, power, and order, comprehended in the name. And farther still, we preserve in the soul collectively the mystic and arcane image of the Gods, and through this we elevate the soul to the Gods, and when elevated con- join it as much as possible with them. But you ask, “ Why, of significant names, we ‘prefer such as are Barbaric to our ownf” Of this, also, there is a mystic reason. For because the Gods have shown that the whole dialect of sacred nations, such as those of the Egyptians and Assyrians, is adapted to sacred concerns; on this account we ought to think it necessary that our conference with the Gods should be in a language allied to them. Because, like- wise, such a mode of speech is the first and most ancient. And especially because those who first learned the names of the Gods, having mingled them with their own proper tongue, delivered them to us, that we might always preserve immoveable the sacred law of tradition, in a language peculiar and adapted to them.
* See the additional notes at the end of vol. v. of my translation of Plato, where many of these names are beauti- fully unfolded from the MS. Scholia of Proclus on the Cratylus.
For if any other thing pertains to the Gods, it is evident that the eternal and immutable must he allied to them.
CHAP. V.
You object, however, “ that he who hears words looks to their signification, so that it is sufficient the conception remains the same, whatever the words may he that are used.'' But the thing is not such as you suspect it to be. For if names subsisted through compact* it would be of no consequence whether some were used instead of others. But if they are suspended from the nature of things, those names which are more adapted to it will also be more dear to the Gods. From this, therefore, it is evident that the language of sacred nations is very reason- ably preferred to that of other men. To which may be added, that names do not entirely pre- serve the same meaning when translated into another language; but there are certain idioms * See the additional notes at the end of vol. v. of my translation of Plato, and also the notes to my translation of Aristotle de Interpretatione, in which the reader will find a treasury of recondite information concerning names, from Proclus and Ammonius.
in each nation which cannot be signified by language to another nation. And, in the next place, though it should be possible to translate them, yet they no longer,, preserve the same powpr when translated. Barbarous names, likewise, have much emphasis, great concise- ness, and participate of less ambiguity, variety, and multitude. Hence, on all these accounts, they are adapted to more excellent natures. Take away, therefore, entirely those suspicions of yours which fall off from the truth, viz. he ivho is invoked is either an Egyptian or uses the Egyptian language.” But rather think that as the Egyptians were the first of men * who * Most historians give the palm of antiquity to the Egyp- tians. And Lucian, in lib. De Syria Dea, says, that the Egyptians are said to be the first among men that had a conception of the Gods, and a knowledge of sacred concerns.
They were also the first that had a knowledge of sacred names.” Atywriot TrpwToi avOpcoTrwv Xeyovrai, Oewv re (.vvoir]V XajSeiv Kai tpa euraxrOat irpiiiTot 8e Kai ovopLara ipa eyvoxrav. Conformably to this, also, an oracle of Apollo, quoted by Eu^bius, says that the E^ptians were the first that disclosed by infinite actions the path that leads to the Gods. This oracle is as follows: Anreivrj yap oSos, p.aKaptuv, Tprj)(€LaT€ ttoXXov, XaAKoScTOiS Ttt TrpuiTa 8iotyop.evrj TrvXetocrii/.
KrpaTTLTOL cacrcnv aOccffyarot eyyeyavtai, Ol TO XttAoV TTtVOVTCS v8u)p NctAcDTlSoS I were allotted the participation of the Gods, the Gods when invoked rejoice in the Egyp- tian rites. Again, however, if all these were the fraudulent devices of enchanters, how is it possible that things which are in the most eminent degree united to the Gods, which also conjoin us with them, and have powers all but equal to those of superior beings, should be phantastic devices, though without them no sacred operation can be effected? But neither do these veils \hy which arcana are concealed^ originate from our passions, which inimour as- IIoAAas Kai ^otvLKe's o8ov<5 [laKapiMV eSarja-av, AcrarvpiOb, AvSoLTe, Kai E/3patwv (lege XaA8a6(ov) yevo? avS/ocov.
i.e. The path by which to deity we climb.
Is arduous, rough, ineffable, sublime; And the strong massy gates, through which we pass In our first course, are bound with chains of brass. Those men the first who of Egyptian birth Drank the fair water of Nilotic earth.
Disclosed by actions infinite this road.
And many paths to God Phoenicians show'd.
This road th' Assyrians pointed out to view.
And this the Lydians and Chaldeans knew.”
For E/3/)a60)v in this oracle I read XaASauov, because I have no doubt that either Aristobulus the Jew, well known for interpolating the writings of the Heathens, or the wicked Eusebius, as he is called by the Emperor Julian, have fraudu lently substituted the former word for the latter.
crihes to a divine nature '' For beginning, not from our passions, but, on the contraiy, from things allied to the Gods, we make use of words adapted to them. “iVbr do we frame conceptions of a divine nature, contrary to its real mode of subsistence." But conformably to the nature which it possesses, and to the truth concerning it, which those obtained who first established the laws of sacred religion, we persevere in our conceptions of divinity. For if any thing else in religious legal institutions is adapted to the Gods, this must certainly he immutability. And it is necessary that ancient prayers,* like sacred asyla, should he preserved invariably the same, neither taking any thing from them, nor adding any thing to them which is elsewhere derived. F or this is nearly the cause at present that both names and prayers have lost their efficacy, because they are continually changed through the innovation and illegality of the Greeks. For the Greeks are naturally studious of novelty, and are carried about * Prayers of this kind are such as those of which Proclus speaks in Tim. p. 65, when he says, “ The cathartic prayer is that which is offered for the purpose of averting diseases originating from pestilence, and other contagious distempers, such as we have written in our temples.” KaGapriKai Se (ru;(ai), em airoT porr ai<i XoipLtKiDV vocrrjp,OT(DV, rj Travrouov pto- Xv(r/*wv oias 5c Kai cv tois icpois €)(op.€v avayeypappevas.
every where by their volatility; neither possess- ing any stability themselves, nor preserving what they have received from others; but rapidly relinquishing this, they transform every thing through an unstable desire of discovering something new. But the Barbarians are stable in their manners, and firmly continue to employ the same words. Hence they are dear to the Gods, and proffer words which are grateful to them; but which it is not lawful for any man by any means to change. And thus much we have said in answer to you concerning names, which though they are inexplicable, and are called Barbaric, yet are adapted to sacred concerns.
SECTION VIII.
CHAP. I.
Leaving, therefore, these particulars, you wish in the next place that I would unfold to you “ What the Egyptians conceive the first cause to he; whether intellect, or above intellect; ivhether alone, or subsisting with some other or others; whether incorporeal, or corporeal; and whether it is the same with the Demiurgus, or is prior to the Demiurgus? Likewise, whether all things are from one principle, or from many principles; whether they have a knowledge of matter, or of primary corporeal qualities; and whether they admit matter to be unbegotten, or to be generated? ” 1, therefore, will in the first place relate to you the cause why in the hooks of the ancient writers of sacred concerns many and various opinions concerning these things are circulated, and also why among those that are still living, and are renowned for their wisdom, the opinion on this subject is not simple and one. I say then, that as there are memj essences, and these differing from each other, the all-various multitude of the princi- ples of these, and which have different orders, were^ delivered by different ancient priests. As Seleucus * narrates, therefore, Hermes de- scribed the principles that rank as wholes in two myriads t of books; or, as we are informed by Manetho J, he perfectly unfolded these principles in thre£ myriads six thousand five hundred and twenty five volumes. But diffe- rent ancient writers differently explained the partial principles of essences. It is necessary, however, by investigation to discover the truth about all these principles, and concisely to un- fold it to you as much as possible. And, in the first place, hear concerning that which is the first subject of your inquiry.
* Porphyry, in lib. ii. De Abstinentia, mentions Seleucus the theologist, and Suidas says that Seleucus the Alexan- drian wrote 100 books concerning ihe Gods.
t These books (^i^Aoi) were most probably nothing more than short discourses, such as the treatises now are which are circulated as written by Hermes, and which, as lambli- chus informs us, contain Hermaic doctrines.
I A great priest, a scribe of the Adyta in Egypt, by birth a Sebanite, and an inhabitant of Heliopolis, as he relates of himself.
CHAP. II.
Prior to truly existing beings and total prin- ciples [or principles that rank as wholes], there is one God, prior to [that deity who is generally believed to he] the first God and king,* im- moveable, and abiding in the solitude of his own unity. For neither is the intelligible con- nected with him, nor any thing else; but he is established as the paradigm of the God who is the father of himself, is self begotten, is father alone, and is truly good. For he is something even greater and prior to this, is the fountain of all things, and the mot of the first intelligible forms. But from this one deity, the God who is sutficient to himself, unfolds himself into light. For this divinity, also, is the principle and God of Gods, ajmonad from the one, prmr to essence, and the principle of essence. For from him entity and essence are derived; and hence, also, he is denominated the principle of intelligibles. These, therefore, are the most ancient principles of all things, which Hermes * In the original, irpioros Kai tov irptuTov Oeov Kai /^acriAews, which Gale translates, prior etiam primo Deo, et rege [sole]. But the addition of sole in his translation is obviously most unappropriate and false: for lamblichus is evidently speak- ing of a deity much superior to the sun.
arranges prior to the etherial, empyrean, and celestial Gods. He likewise delivered to us the history of the empyrean Gods in one hun- dred books; of the etherial in an equal num- ber; and of the celestial in a thousand books.
CHAP. III.
According to another order, however, he arranges the God Emeph* prior to, and as the leader of, the celestial Gods. And he says that this God is an intellect, itself intellectually perceiving itself, and converting intellections to itself. But prior to this, he arranges the im- partible one, which he says is the first para- digm, and which he denominates Eicton. In this, also, is contained that which is first intel- lective, and the first intelligible, and which is to be worshiped through silence alone. Besides these, also, other leaders preside over the fabri- cation of visible natures. For the demiurgic intellect, who is the curator of truth and wisdom, desce^ing into generation, and leading the power of occult reasons into light, is called in * For Hixrjcf) here, Gale conjectures that we should read Kvrj<^ Kneph: for Plutarch says that the unbegotten Kneph was celebrated with an extraordinary degree of veneration by the Egyptian Thebans.
the Egyptian tongue Amon; but in conse- quence of perfecting all things with veracity and artificially, he is called Ptha. The Greeks, however, assume Ptha for Vulcan, solely direct- ing their attention to the artificial peculiarity of the God. So far, also, as he is effective of ffood he is called Osiris; and he has other appellations through other powers and ener- gies. With the Egyptians, therefore, there is another domination of the whole elements in generation, and of the powers contained in them; four of these powers being male and four female, which they attribute to the sun. And there is, likewise, another government of the whole of nature about generation, which they assign to the moon.'^’" But dividing the heavens into two, or four, or twelve, or six-and- thirty parts, or the doubles of these, they give to the parts a greater or less number of rulers. And over all these they place one ruler, who transcends all the rest. Thus, therefore, the doctrine of the Egyptians concerning princi- ples, proceeding from on high as far as to the last of things, begins from. one principle, and descends to a multitude which is governed by this one; and every where an indefinite nature \ \ Hence the moon is said by Proclus to be avToirrov rrjs <f>v(re(Ds ayaXfia, the self-visible statue or image of nature.
is under the dominion of a certain definite measure, and of the supreme unical cause of all things. But God produced matter by di- viding materiality from essentiality;* and this being vital, the Demiurgus receiving, fabricated from it the simple and impassive spheres. But he distributed in an orderly manner the last of it into generable and corruptible bodies.
CHAP. lY.
These things, therefore, having been accurately discussed, the solution of the doubts which you have met with in certain books will be mani- fest. For the hooks ivhich are circulated under the name of Hermes contain Hermaic opinions, though they frequently employ the language of the philosophers: for th^y were translated from the Egypt